This has been something that has been discussed for the last year at least - there is nothing constructive to come of this when it has already been flogged to death here and resulted in hate trains in the subreddit that have led to stress for the author and an unfair reputation for the game to the point where people who hadn’t even played it frequently trashed it.
It’s really not that big of a deal - if you don’t want to deal with that stuff in the game, then you can just be friends with her and romance someone else. There’s nothing forcing you into romancing Ignis - it’s entirely your own choice and there’s other four? romance options in this game with some more planned for book two.
Honestly all of this nonsense is just a question of “what is an RO”? Ignis already has more romantic interaction with the player than like, A in book one of Wayhaven. Is Ignis more of an RO? Less? Does a CoG RO empirically have to have a fully monogamous and uninterrupted relationship with the player to “count”? Are they no longer a valid RO if the relationship only lasts for say, one book out of three? Must all ROs follow a preordained path of flirt>kiss>sex>commitment and eternal love? I think its a bit sad if we’d really force all authors to write romantic interactions with characters like that.
I enjoy Ignis and the other ROs having agency. I like that they feel more like people who can just go, “I like you, but I don’t like you that way” it’s nice.
Nobody’s saying that it can’t be your cup of tea, but also it’s not fair to go and insist that your views are the only one’s that are valid. We’re not saying it’s not okay to be upset. What we’re saying is that this is how the game is and you can opt-out by not selecting to RO her.
Not gonna lie, it is a little weird how so much of the discussion about the Ignis situation revolves around Seeker and treats Ignis, y’know, the actual character it centers around like just a prop.
I’m not really bothered that people discuss this particular plotline, or that Ignis seems more popular than the other ROs, but if you want to discuss what’s going on, it’d be much more enjoyable (and interesting, personally) to discuss her rather than Seeker, who has yet to make even a single in-character comment about the relationship.
“Why does the emotionally-unavailable ultra-competent team leader push herself into a relationship that she knows will fracture her team?” sounds like a way more interesting avenue of discussing the same topic while also breathing fresh air into it.
To me, and RO is an character your MC has a chance to romance, and the fate of the relationship is destined by what the MC does, not try to romance one character only for them to ultimately go with another because plot demands it; that’s why I prefer her as a fling because the MC can get some time with her but doesn’t effect the MC/player much since it’s just a one time thing
I mean tbf the game heavily hints outside of meta statements that the romance will fail.
Now you’re in your right to want romantic interest to always end in success but that’s a rigid trope and you can’t tell the stories of a failed endeavour in that case.
And tbh you can just ignore Ignis,the game doesn’t force you into it.I find Aki more interesting in terms of potential than Ignis even if she’s not immediatly compelling.
To be fair, this should not come as a surprise when Seeker is a large part of this scenario and the person who ultimately winds up with Ignis. This doesn’t center around just Ignis but quite explicitly around Ignis and Seeker, as star-crossed lovers or whatever it is they’re being painted as.
I think this might be because nothing about what we get to see in the game so far would suggest there is such a problem – to the point where i’m not even sure what exactly you talk about.
If it’s Ignis pushing herself into relationship with MC, then i don’t see why it’d be viewed as way to “fracture the team” when the rest of the team (including Seeker) ostensibly don’t give a damn if Ignis gets into a romance with anyone.
If it’s instead the idea that Ignis pushing herself into relationship with Seeker is supposed to have such end effect… again, the only person who might possibly take offense at such development is the MC, who is completely new addition to the team, and them leaving in a huff would at worst just result in a return to the status quo from the start of the game. I.e. nothing earth-shattering.
It’s very likely they’re meant to be “star-crossed lovers” but there’s also a very real chance that for right now, they’re doomed by the narrative for pain and suffering for a bit followed by happiness after.
I was very clear, your criticism is valid if it’s constructive, informed, and polite. When you expressed your views in such a way there were no flags. But when you made uniformed criticisms that leaned towards personal they got flagged.
I don’t think that’s true. I mean, power-wise, that might be the case, but when you consider all the information and knowledge that the MC has gathered about the team in such a short period, there is a legitimate security risk with earning their enmity and forcing them out of the crew.
Not to mention that the MC is someone that was forcibly implanted into the League’s lives by Ignis. If she’s bringing a new figure into the group, forcing it to adapt, and then personally causes the friction with that figure, then the cohesion of the team suffers - and there could be questions about her leadership.
She is legitimately playing with fire, and just because it probably won’t go badly doesn’t mean it can’t.
Anyhoo the Ignis RO controversy is way too old for any critcism to be profitable in my opinion.
Now to be fair to both sides, their frustration is understandable. If Ignis is the most popular RO (I don’t know if that’s the case I’m going off what JC said here) then having the most popular RO be a dead end (as far as the MC and Ignis’s romantic relationship is concered) is obviously going to be a controversial decision. As others have said, it’s a realistic outcome to the relationship, but it also isn’t the type of thing you typically see in fiction. A sizeable chunk of the audience who wants to romance Ignis, and is given the opportunity to do so initially, will naturally be frustrated when they are unable to do so through no incorrect decisions on their part.
But the controversy has been had. This has been going on for ages. It’s not as if the author isn’t aware of those opinions. It is his story and he has the right to do with it as he pleases, and there’s valid story reasons for the decision he came to. Said decision isn’t likely to change. There’s no point in bringing it up again, since nothing constructive can come of it.
Further criticism on the subject will achieve nothing but bad vibes.
Clearly not since we’ve been having this discussion cyclically, hell if you go to one of my posts literally a year ago, people were still focused on “muh ro” and apparently we’re still on it
Well, i guess this is then a question if MC would be so much of a dick and plain stupid person to antagonize and try to harm a team of superheroes just because of a breakup with the girl who fell for someone else. Which isn’t to say it’s not possible, but it’d be pretty much origin story for a villain (and a pretty pathetic and short-lived one at that)
I also don’t think they’d be actually forced out of the team over it, and any sort of a leave would be a voluntary action on the MC’s part. Although there’s also the matter of MC not even having any real option to actually leave – since them being part of the team is what shields them from facing legal charges for destruction of property plus assault on the president of U.S, etc. So they can sulk, and if they can’t be an adult about it then i suppose they can get benched until they get over themselves, but overall i just can’t see this as any real problem for the team proper.
edit: i guess another way to put it would be, while there is some potential for negative consequences, there’s no denying that, it doesn’t really feel like severe/certain enough outcome to be a serious detriment. I mean, one could make a point that starting any relationship within the team carries just as much of a risk of “team fracture” if things don’t work out. So you could say Ignis has already been playing with fire with the whole blatant crush she’s got on Seeker even if she’s mostly passive about it. And obv. so is the MC if they try to hit on any of their team members.
Note that the author has already mentioned a few months ago the game would receive not just a warning but also potentially a toggle which would disable the options that can lead to Ignis romance, for those who can’t help themselves. So at this point such requests aren’t really needed either.
I rarely comment and have been following this IF since the early stages.
As such, I have been reading this entire thread and then some, piece by piece, and one thing I have to say is that this has been true for a long time.
Most of the community can see it and it has been talked about in forums (other than here) and on reddit.
People asking for Ignis to be labled as a fling or at least heavily warned where the “romance” will go is valid.
I have dabbled in writing and have come to a similar situation as it is currently with Ignis and Seeker but the main difference is that my two characters who I characterized as “star crossed lovers” can be and not to be.
I will still give the readers an ability to “make or break” those “star crossed lovers” (since the mc can end up with one or both of them and they can even choose not to be with them at all but those two “star crossed lovers” will slowly gravitate towards each other slowly either way).
With that I respect the choices of my own characters to recognize the flaws and expand their introspection or take those flaws and mold them into something better and also the power of the reader. It introduces fluidity and freedom in choices because the world is never truly set in stone.
However, the author of this IF has the creative freedom to write anything and it is ultimately the reader’s choice to read the IF and now knowing what they will get themselves into.
It’s a choice of “make it or break it” in a metaphor.
Choice in how things are done matter and everything has consequences.
